hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stack <st...@duboce.net>
Subject Re: Moving 2.0 forward
Date Mon, 23 Oct 2017 16:53:52 GMT
(Reviving this thread)

Lets push out alpha-4 this week. Alpha-4 is the release that has the
refactor of the Coprocessor API shutting down access to internals marked

The outstanding list is here:

Please push in anything marked alpha-4 that belongs to you.

If issue, talk out loud on this thread. If you need a review to land an
item, shout on the issue and here; we'll help you out.

As is, items are coming along nicely I'd say. We need to merge the filter
branch -- HBASE-18410 -- so APIs are finished for hbase2.

Post alpha-4, we'll have to hunt down our downstreamers and help them test
on top of alpha-4 so rolling into beta-1, we have confidence our
downstreamers know what to expect (or we discover what we missed BEFORE we

Thanks for time,

On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 2:04 PM, Stack <stack@duboce.net> wrote:

> I'll put up an alpha3 RC Monday, probably Monday night. That should be
> time, if we all sprint, for the public-facing API fixes to be done.
> I had a bunch of Coprocessor refactor and fixup scheduled for alpha3 but
> it is plain that more time is needed (in spite of valiant effort so far by
> Anoop, Duo, Appy, etc.). Therefore, lets run a 2.0.0-alpha-4 whose theme is
> "Coprocessor Fixup". Hopefully we can put an alpha-4 up by the following
> week.
> We should then be ready for beta (beta == no new features, no API changes,
> just fixes).
> Thanks,
> St.Ack
> On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 12:35 PM, Stack <stack@duboce.net> wrote:
>> I put up the hbase-2.0.0-alpha2 release candidate. Please vote on it.
>> For hbase-2.0.0-alpha3, the theme is solidifying API. I hope to get a
>> release out in the next week or so.
>> I did a weeding of 2.0.0 issues over the last day. If folks are
>> interested in helping out, below are the items I think we need done for
>> alpha3 (below are at least 'Critical' status, are API possibly altering
>> items, and are absent those JIRAs that are making active progress, i.e. the
>> HTD/HCD revamp by Chia-Ping Tsai). A project NOT listed that needs doing is
>> what Andrew did comparing 1.3. and 1.4 APIs
>> * HBASE-18622 Mitigate compatibility concerns between branch-1 and
>> branch-2
>> This is to do what Andrew did between 1.3 and 1.4 branches only do it
>> between branch-1 and branch-2.
>> * HBASE-10462 Recategorize some of the client facing Public / Private
>> interfaces
>> This one is almost done. It could do with a finish, attention to the
>> items in last comment, and then our codebase could do with another sweep
>> after the spirit of this issue since a bunch has gone in since the pass
>> that was the basis of this issue.
>> * HBASE-10504 Define Replication Interface
>> I was going to take a crack at this as part of the revamp forced by
>> 'HBASE-15982 Interface ReplicationEndpoint extends Guava's Service' but if
>> anyone else is interested, be my guest.
>> * HBASE-14996 Some more API cleanup for 2.0
>> Has a bunch of subtasks, some of which are being worked on. Needs
>> finishing.
>> * HBASE-14998 Unify synchronous and asynchronous methods in Admin and
>> cleanup
>> Needs a pass. Small issue I think. Could also look at new AsyncClient and
>> make sure symmetry.
>> * HBASE-15607 Remove PB references from Admin for 2.0
>> Predicated on result of an ongoing DISCUSSION thread but needs to be done.
>> Rolling upgrade will have implications for our API. Would be good to try
>> it and figure what needs fixup (as said above, according to trial by Sean,
>> we might not be too bad here):
>> * HBASE-16060 1.x clients cannot access table state talking to 2.0 cluster
>> * HBASE-16550 Procedure v2 - Add AM compatibility for 2.x Master and 1.x
>> RSs; i.e. support Rolling Upgrade from hbase-1 to -2.
>> * HBASE-17442 Move most of the replication related classes to
>> hbase-server package
>> The above would be good to do generally but it may make for ripples in
>> API so would be good to do now.
>> * HBASE-18106 Redo ProcedureInfo and LockInfo
>> Balazs is working on this. The idea is that we avoid adding two new types
>> to our API, two types that are nought but curtailed, read-only views on
>> internals. Input if you have time appreciated.
>> * HBASE-18596 A hbase1 cluster should be able to replicate to a hbase2
>> cluster; verify
>> Esteban is looking at this one
>> * HBASE-9417 SecureBulkLoadEndpoint should be folded in core
>> * HBASE-17143 Scan improvement
>> Our Coprocessor Interface needs a tough edit. It exposes implementations
>> marked audience Private and returns implementations rather than Interfaces.
>> In a few locations, we allow returning an alternate implementation
>> altogether which is probably something we don't want a CP doing. To that
>> end, the following issues started by Duo and Anoop need to be taken to the
>> finish line; ideally they'd have an owner:
>> * HBASE-18169 Coprocessor fix and cleanup before 2.0.0 release <= The
>> umbrella issue.
>> * HBASE-18298 RegionServerServices Interface cleanup for CP expose
>> * HBASE-16769 Deprecate/remove PB references from MasterObserver and
>> RegionServerObserver
>> Nice-to-haves:
>> * HBASE-15284 Make TimeRange constructors IA.Private and remove unused
>> TimeRange constructors
>> * HBASE-10944 Remove all kv.getBuffer() and kv.getRow() references
>> existing in the code
>> This is the end of an old long-running project moving up on to Cell
>> Interface. We think it is done but for a few little items (deprecate KV
>> methods in MR and provide Cell versions instead...)
>> * HBASE-13271 Table#puts(List<Put>) operation is indeterminate; needs
>> fixing
>> * HBASE-13346 Clean up Filter package for post 1.0
>> * HBASE-14255 Simplify Cell creation post 1.0
>> * HBASE-14997
>> Move compareOp and Comparators out of filter to client package
>> * HBASE-13740 Stop using Hadoop private interfaces
>> What about:
>> * HBASE-18601 Remove Htrace 3.2
>> As has been noted, the HTrace API is our 'trace' API.
>> If interested in any of the above and you need a legup, just ask in the
>> issue and I'll be by....
>> Thanks,
>> St.Ack
>> On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 10:54 AM, Stack <stack@duboce.net> wrote:
>>> Heads-up:
>>> I'm about to put up an hbase-2.0.0-alpha2 Release Candidate. Theme is
>>> updated dependencies, reliance on relocated popular libs (guava, netty,
>>> protobuf), purge of checked-in generated src, and master-carries-no-regions
>>> by default.
>>> alpha3 I hope will follow soon after (end-of-August?). Its theme will be
>>> settling the APIs and compatibility (At first blush, we are not looking too
>>> bad; our Sean ran some tests over weekend that have hbase-1 client running
>>> against an hbase-2 cluster....). The Coprocessor Interface revamp should be
>>> done by alpha3 (i.e. returning Interfaces rather than Implementations, and
>>> our shutdown of CPs accessing classes in hbase marked InterfaceAudience).
>>> We'll also have purged thirdparty classes from our API; e.g. guava 0.12
>>> Service showing through in our replication API and protobufs in Admin
>>> Interface. On alpha3, we will have to do a bunch of outreach to make sure
>>> our downstreamers are up on what is coming down the pipe.
>>> Beta1 in mid-September?
>>> I encourage you to check out the items marked for hbase2:
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/HBASE/versions/12327188 Edit as
>>> you see appropriate. Punt if you know the JIRA will not get any attention
>>> in next month or so.
>>> A bunch of issues marked blocker are unassigned. I'll leave them as is
>>> another while but I'll boot them soon.
>>> While I have your attention:
>>> + I think we should leave thrift version at 0.9.3. Moving hbase thrift
>>> to 0.10.0 will break existing clients. The change is easy enough if folks
>>> need to upgrade their hbase thrift. See HBASE-18591.
>>> + Upgrade from 0.94 is disallowed. You have to get to 1.0 first (0.98?).
>>> St.Ack
>>> On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 9:43 AM, Stack <stack@duboce.net> wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Aug 1, 2017 at 2:06 PM, Josh Elser <elserj@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>> On 7/31/17 9:00 AM, Stack wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 12:25 PM, Josh Elser<elserj@apache.org>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>> I like the idea of this also hitting 2.0 as it would make the
>>>>>>> feature a
>>>>>>> bit more "real", but am obviously a little nervous (I have no
>>>>>>> to be
>>>>>>> nervous though). I am pretty happy with the feature in terms
of how
>>>>>>> much it
>>>>>>> is covered via testing.
>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-17748
>>>>>>> Sounds good to me. Whats involved? Backport? If so, +1 Josh.
>>>>>> Last think on space quota says that need doc too. See 'Space Quota'
>>>>>> here:
>>>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WCsVlnHjJeKUcl7wHwqb4z9i
>>>>>> Eu_ktczrlKHK8N4SZzs/edit#heading=h.wuw3a6jukzo5
>>>>>> Does this little section need an update Josh?
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> S
>>>>> Yep, just a couple of cherry-picks. Good test coverage and some docs
>>>>> already included for 17748.  Happy to put that on my plate if you're
>>>>> with it. I can reasonably assume that no one is against it :)
>>>>> I think I had knocked out docs for the "phase 1" stuff before we
>>>>> merged it in from the original feature branch. I'll double check and
>>>>> the gdoc. Perhaps this was just a timing thing.
>>>> Thanks Josh,
>>>> S

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message